Hasn't Glastonbury always had at least one headliner who are relatively modern? By that logic, if the rumours are to be believed, then it'll be Daft Punk then two of Prince, Depeche Mode, Fleetwood Mac and Stone Roses

...and I suspect I have this in common with many people, I really really like the first Stone Roses record. BUT

1) Ian Brown kills the material live. There's being slightly off tune and then there's utterly destroying it
2) These days going to a Roses gig means being surrounding by beerboys belching Wonderwall into your face

the thing with the Stone Roses is that the first album is full of really melodic pop songs which aren't exactly amazing but are really pleasant to listen to, but they've been blown up to such a huge proportion by the music press over the last 25 years that it completely ruins however fun those songs may have originally been. You can hardly imagine someone listening to those songs without knowing about any of the Stone Roses hype and thinking "yeah, definitely massive festival headliner material". And essentially they'd only be headlining because of those songs.

And it doesn't help that the band are clearly all cunts, and cunts identify with cunts so their fanbase are all these dickheads in buttoned up polo shirts gurning at each other whilst rubbing their crotches with pages ripped out of Zoo magazine, who ultimately aren't even interested in the music itself, but more with that weird brand of North West-centric homoerotic pathetic pseudo-masculine band fandom.

actually i can't really be bothered. But i'm not really sure that the Stone Roses' writing is particularly... multi layered. But Pulp are a very very clever band, and the way that mid period Pulp used elements of pastiche without any nostalgia in order to explore that murky area between being working or middle class, between being part or not part of mass culture, between artistic merit and kitsch rubbish, and most famously between sex as pleasure and sex as power, has never really been done by another indie band, ever.

Obviously it was the lyrics which most explicitly explored these themes, but every other element of Pulp during that time did too, from their press photos to merch to fanzine to interviews.. and especially the fantastic music videos directed by Pedro Romhanyi. Pulp were one of the most thematically consistent bands I can think of, and in my opinion they are the best band to ever get THAT famous.

It's not really a Stone Roses vs. Pulp thing, I mean I can understand why people would like the Stone Roses music better than Pulp's, as that's just personal taste. But maybe I'm wrong, but the Stone Roses never seemed to me to be a band who explored any particular themes or who created music for anything more than musics sake. And, not that it really proves anything, but I study music and have come across quite a lot of academic articles about Pulp just by chance, but never anything specifically about the Stone Roses. Something probably exists mind you, but I'd expect it to be something about the press or the overall music scene, rather than the music itself. Of course there's no such thing as 'better' and I shouldn't have used that word, but I definitely think that Pulp have much, much more to offer in their music than the Stone Roses ever did.

then you'd never really be able to get anywhere near as much from them as I have. Pulp are a band that you really have to get into to appreciate properly. They're also funny, cos they're not really a singles band or an albums band- they're an era band, and each era of Pulp has a different crisis, and a different motivation behind it.. thematically, I mean. But the b sides are just as important as anything else. Like, you'd be hard pushed to really understand the His'n'Hers era without hearing Frightened or the Susan trilogy.

I dunno, this is hardly great persuasive writing- I'm too close to the subject matter, too much of a fanboy. I could just talk about Pulp forever.

So I guess that'd rule out Kanye, Prince, Rihanna etc... I'd heard Mode and Mac rumours a while ago, so I'd have thought them plus The Stone Roses or Daft Punk.
Really can't see Led Zep ever playing again (*drags out well-worn anecdote of being sat right behind Dave Grohl going yampee at their O2 gig*)

No chance now, its been far too long since they've had any real hit, and their legacy, while musically great, isn't quite as revered as a band like Fleetwood Mac/Rolling Stones as far as a mainstream audience is concerned. Still, I'd say they're probably on a similar level to Prince, so who knows.

Gilmour likes his aeroplanes, expensive hobby that.
Waters is apparently not adverse to little more Floyd action, Mason does as he's told (probably).....i think if Pink Floyd were to do a few final shows... a couple of hours down on Mikeys farm might be quite appealling to them

Sunday night, headlining the dance tent. Last Homework show I think. A girl climbed to the top of the tent and the had to stop. It was all kinds of amazing. I think Kula Shaker or Ash were headlining the main stage at the time!

He just had 9 top ten singles from a single album, which if I remember correctly is a world record. Plus, Glastonbury has form for booking stadium dance acts in the past to headline, Basement Jaxx in 2005 for example. Admittedly, there are other acts who would be more likely candidates, but to rule him out completely would be unwise.

and another one as a featured artist for We Found Love. He's bigger than he's ever been.

I think a lot of the songs people hear on the radio, they don't even realise they're his, because he's not really doing vocals anymore. He's getting people like Kelis, Tinie Tempah, Florence and Example to do the vocals so maybe people assume the track's are theirs. Feels So Close was the only recent hit he did the vocals on.

If it was billed as Calvin Harris & Friends feat: Rihanna, Dizzee Rascal, Florence & the Machine, Chris Brown, Kelis, etc. etc... well, I'm still not sure they'd book it, but he could probably pull it off.

They are costantly flogging the back catalogue, Waters remains fame hungry and Mason would do as he's told. Gilmour turned up last year (or was it the year before)and played Comfortably Numb with Waters, Gilmours stubborn, but not stupid....i saw them 4 times firstly in 88, i think Waters is a dick, but i'd pay to see them share a stage again before their gone....i'll bet im not alone either........so yes, big big big fucking longshot, but more plausable than people might think.

However if the three headliners have not played the festival before, then Adele may not do it, strictly speaking. She played a small tent in 2007. And she has said herself she doesn't want to do festivals.

back in the Guardian tent for the best slice of LDN in the shapely shape (sorry!) of Adele. She's got a voice that quivers down your every vertebra like a lock-stocked Billie Holiday meets Erykah Badu or Jill Scott. Her set faintly tinkles around the room full of rain-shirkers, but despite sounding like dusty butterflies rushing in slow motion through Brixton it fails to make me cry a river this time around

Standard weekend tickets will go on sale at 9am BST on Sunday, 6th October. As in previous years, Festival goers will be able to book a ticket by paying a £50 deposit per person, either online at glastonbury.seetickets.com, on 0844 412 4635 from a UK phone or, for international callers, from +44 1159 934 183. The full price of a Glastonbury 2014 ticket is £210 + £5 booking fee. Purchasers will be able to book up to six tickets per transaction.

But so uninspiring, made worse that kasabian cuntman said they hadn't been asked when interviewed last week.. still not confirmed but from the sound of things it might as well be. Prince and outkast for sat pls

that 2009 slot was when they were arguably at the peak of their powers, 'Fire' was huge etc. how they can command a headline position half a decade later with dwindling popularity (still quite high) is beyond me

and he doesn't usually drop headline names around unless he has some solid information to back it up. With the whole Prince trying to sue publicists saying he was going to play Glasto this year he now seems pretty certain Eagles are going to round up the headliners.

However as I said this isn't confirmed but I tend to take his word more than most.

I prefer... it's not as weird or HUGE as Shangri-la but it's got lots of interesting things going on... 2011 they had Wrestling and Wall Of Death Motorbikes as well as some funky latino music areas... it's great :)

Metallica are almost a dead cert to headline the OTHER stage in Saturday, well they've never played before have they? Kind of surpised they'd take the secondary stage but they've being dying to play for ages.

Yeah of big hits but not in that kinda league for me and it's not like they've not played for years and they're reforming for a big one off. Really don't see it happening.
I've been wrong before right enough.

At the time he may have thought this was the case, it's been very clear that they tried to get Prince this year but it fell through recently and Fleetwood Mac sound like they were nailed on (and have said several times since this year they will be playing Glastonbury at some point) this may be this year still now that John McVie appears to have reacted well to the treatment and Metallica are currently heavily rumored to be headlining in some capacity (Pyramid or Other Stage) so I guess the was some truth in it and if he forgot Arcade Fire had played at the time of making the statement then I guess that makes sense.

Whatever the reason its probably the case of Michael Eavis getting over excited and making a statement before anything was confirmed. Can't explain Kasabian though.

they can't announce it because of Sonispheres contract. They are a last minute inclusion after talks with Prince fell through, Emily said they cant announce the Saturday headliner because of contractual obligations.

think about what Glastonbury festival USED to mean; a celebration of a different way of living, outside of capitalism... a way of living where all people need is each other and the music and the natural blinking world. Where the nature-destroying impulses of Western civilisation are replaced with a respect for Mother Earth and a sincere desire to co-operate with nature to give a better, more optimistic, and -- dare I say it -- more far out future for the next generation.

And then skip forwards to 2014, and Eavis knowingly books a band that - when they play in an outdoor space, not constrained by a roof - will SURELY do unspeakable damage to the o-zone layer.

"Next year's headliners are more or less in place. They're three bands who haven't played Glastonbury, and that's important. There aren't many bands left who haven't played the festival, and before we run out I'd like to persuade the ones on my wish list to come down. I think I've managed that with these three."
So nothing concrete there.

He's got a long history of jumping the gun before everything is inked on paper - something it looks he's still doing as he's just said in an interview that he's booking headliners for 2016(!).

Wonder who he thought he had for this year? Fleetwood Mac seems almost certain, Eagles and Prince for the other two?

Was close to throwing £450 at two tickets this year, but am counting my lucky stars I didn't. Not even worth half the price of admission. Might go on holiday or something instead. Get a bit of sun and a bit of culture.

I didn't say the line up was bad!
Just that the big names on top were a bit weak for my taste, been plenty of times before I know that means sod all and will be loving it when I get there. Already more bands on there than I can realistically see